EU plays hardball. complaints lodged

partholon

just on newstalk news now that a formal complaint has been made against charlie mccreevy for saying he didnt read the treaty and irelands been told that there will be NO renegotiaton of the treaty.

apparenty there was war breaking out in the parliment/comissin ~(im writing as i type so forgive mistakes, rest should be on newstalks site.)

ShooterSF

Really is getting childish. If this is how the E.U deals with not getting their own way I never want to see any more decision making centralized so a bunch of temper tantrum europeans can kick and scream new laws into power.

Dirk Gently

partholon wrote: »

a formal complaint has been made against charlie mccreevy for saying he didnt read the treaty

because he didn't read it or because he "said" he didn't read it?

partholon

dont know yet. infos still vague. im waiting for news at six on newstalk to hear more as its not on any other site yet that i can find.

EDIT. ok updating from newstalks 6 o clock news. theyre reporting dramatic scenes on the floor of the EU Parliment, with irish leaders being slammed by the leaders of the socialist group and an offical complaint against mccreevy by martin schultz (thats the way it sounds anyway) the greens leader then demanded the further ratification by everyone else giving out about us pocketing EU money and someone called the entire country stupid.

VoidStarNull

NO campaigners have spent the last few weeks complaining about McCreevy not reading the treaty.

Dirk Gently

fairly hardline stuff.

looks like the Irish government is being held to account because of their "failure to explain to the Irish people the benefits of the Lisbon treaty".

Regarding mc creavy it was asked "just what kind of people do we allow in this commission".

Looks like those who voted to stick 2 fingers up at the government have got their wish. The Irish government is on the end of a battering according to that snippet.

Re-negotiation also seems to be ruled out, by the sounds of it the "Governments failure" to produce a yes vote has turned european leaders against them. Sounded like the bold child being sent to bed without dinner.

IRLConor

clown bag wrote: »

looks like the Irish government is being held to account because of their "failure to explain to the Irish people the benefits of the Lisbon treaty".

No arguments from me there.

clown bag wrote: »

Regarding mc creavy it was asked "just what kind of people do we allow in this commission".

Finally! They noticed!

clown bag wrote: »

Re-negotiation also seems to be ruled out, by the sounds of it the "Governments failure" to produce a yes vote has turned european leaders against them. Sounded like the bold child being sent to bed without dinner.

I suspect the attitude is "Why should we renegotiate when you didn't even make a proper effort?" which as far as I'm concerned is a fair point.

Provided the EU distinguish between the Irish government and the Irish people there might be a silver lining in this cloud.

Rb

ShooterSF wrote: »

Really is getting childish. If this is how the E.U deals with not getting their own way I never want to see any more decision making centralized so a bunch of temper tantrum europeans can kick and scream new laws into power.

Fully agree. This is ridiculous.

I read over the weekend that Sarkozy and Merkel headed off to try to convince the other countries yet to ratify to get it done, every paper is saying the one and only reason they're doing this is in an attempt to bully Ireland. Sickening behaviour.

Dirk Gently

IRLConor wrote: »

I suspect the attitude is "Why should we renegotiate when you didn't even make a proper effort?" .

That's how I interpreted it from the piece on the newstalk stream. It was just a one minute piece though so more info might be available on the bog 1 news at 9 tonight.

zig

well id be annoyed too if after all the work put into the treaty the irish government were too lazy to point out the benefits to the people. I had to find out for myself, thats all well and good for someone who is very interested in this, but not everyone is.

FrankGrimes

These are some quite concerning developments - anyone hearing any updates please post on here as this is the exact kind of incident that can be reported in several different ways depending on the leaning of the broadcaster, so it would be good to see a balance of what is being reported.

I'm a Yes voter but am quite concerned about the reaction across Europe to our No vote. This news just confirms the suspicion I had all along that people were underestimating just how isolated we would become from Europe if we voted No. That doesn't mean that it's right, but a certain amount of it was inevitable.

I have very little time for anyone that voted no in order to send some message to the government. The government were not supporting a yes vote for their own good (definitely not exclusively so anyway), they were supporting a yes as they see Ireland's involvement in an EU with more streamlined instituions as processed as being a positive thing for the entire country. Voting no to get back at the government is biting off the nose to spite the face or however that one goes.

As I have posted on here elsewhere, the vast majority of the No campaigners and voters did not indicate that they are anti-EU, they are just anti-Lison treaty, so presumably they wanted to at least maintain the current level of involvement we have in the EU. I also think (and the Indo's survey in another thread here would seem to confirm, though that's a tiny 2,000 sample population so I wouldn't regard it as concrete) that a lot of No voters really did think that we could just go back and "get a better deal".

That is patently not going to happen, so the focus in my opinion should be on getting a reasonably reliable indication of why people voted No, and then adding wording to the treaty to explicitly address these concerns. I think the majority of them are actually implicit in the current treaty (i.e. no EU decision making on our corporation tax, abortion, conscription etc.) but if they need to be called out explicitly to address voter concerns, there should be no opposition from the EU.

If the findings of engaging with the public showed the government that the Irish people are happy to be isolated from the EU (which would contradict everything put forward by the No campaign), well then the government would have a mandate to stick it to the EU and tell them that's the way the Irish people want it. I don't think the majority of the Irish people feel this way so I don't think that day would ever come (I would be looking to emigrate if it did).

So, the government are now in a very tricky spot (due to their own incompetent Yes campaign) as the EU are feeling that the No vote is the Irish people saying they want to be isolated from Europe, but the government know that's not in the best interest for our future and they also feel pretty sure that's not really how the majority of Irish people feel. It's not going to be easy, but here's hoping the government (and main opposition parties) rise to the occassion and manage to show the diplomatic skills I'm not sure they possess that are needed to figure out what their public really wants and then work this out with the EU.

ShooterSF

FrankGrimes, I don't think any rewording would be satisfactory now. How can one accept that a country under the current unanimity ruling which protects smaller countries should be isolated because of a decision they are well within their right to make.

It's school yard bullying at it's worst. Peer pressure. Of course you have a right to say no, we respect your right to have an input on this decision. That's the only fair way to do things. Oh but if you make the wrong decision we're going to exclude you and verbally attack you in public and make complaints about people you put forward to the commission.

Personally I don't want those kind of people to make our laws! Again who's to say if Ireland tried to veto something later on they wouldn't be hit with the same anti-Europe winging.

Scofflaw

FrankGrimes wrote:

As I have posted on here elsewhere, the vast majority of the No campaigners and voters did not indicate that they are anti-EU, they are just anti-Lison treaty, so presumably they wanted to at least maintain the current level of involvement we have in the EU. I also think (and the Indo's survey in another thread here would seem to confirm, though that's a tiny 2,000 sample population so I wouldn't regard it as concrete) that a lot of No voters really did think that we could just go back and "get a better deal".

If that's the survey I think it is, I presume it's a standard MRBI poll, in which case the 2,000 sample is statistically valid.

cordially,
Scofflaw

marco_polo

Scofflaw wrote: »

If that's the survey I think it is, I presume it's a standard MRBI poll, in which case the 2,000 sample is statistically valid.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The sampling error ought to be under 3% on a size of 2000

nesf

Some of the more "hardline" federalist MEPs are losing the head a bit, I wouldn't take it any more seriously than comments by any of the hotter headed members in the Dáil to be honest.

The full debate tomorrow should be interesting in that where the more moderate MEPs stand on all this.

limklad

If the EU Politicians do not listen to us properly and keep this Irish bashing going, it will send a big signal to applicant small countries and other small countries within the EU, maybe they should not join the EU or consider leaving it. The EU will bully us, if we do not do what they say.

It is also sending another clear message from the EU Politicians:
that We (the EU Politicians) do not care about your Nation democracy citizens rights and voice. We only care about ours voice and do what we want you to do. This gives the No Campaign credibility. I bet the “No Campaign” of bigots from “left and right wing groups” are laughing because they are been proven right about QMV.

They also send another signal, that they will not respect previous agreements and will force agreement on weaker nations.

hawkeye1000

how can u call the no campainers bigots. everyone has the right 2 vote which ever why they please even if u dont agree with it.

Scofflaw

hawkeye1000 wrote: »

how can u call the no campainers bigots. everyone has the right 2 vote which ever why they please even if u dont agree with it.

If you look, you'll find that the only person here who has referred to "bigots" is limklad, who is a No voter. He has insulted himself, and now you are outraged on his behalf.

cordially,
Scofflaw

nesf

limklad wrote: »

If the EU Politicians do not listen to us properly and keep this Irish bashing going, it will send a big signal to applicant small countries and other small countries within the EU, maybe they should not join the EU or consider leaving it. The EU will bully us, if we do not do what they say.

It is also sending another clear message from the EU Politicians:
that We (the EU Politicians) do not care about your Nation democracy citizens rights and voice. We only care about ours voice and do what we want you to do. This gives the No Campaign credibility. I bet the “No Campaign” of bigots from “left and right wing groups” are laughing because they are been proven right about QMV.

They also send another signal, that they will not respect previous agreements and will force agreement on weaker nations.

You are over-reacting considering these comments, as far as I understand, came from a single German MEP who is a committed federalist, i.e. one of the minority of MEPs who want to see a USoE of some kind or another. You should not attribute his rants as being representative of the EU any more than you should take the crowings of the UK Independence Party MEPs as being representative.

K-9

It seems the so called bullying by France isn't working.

Finland and Austria have said Ireland will not be bullied.

The No side lend far too much significance to France. They did it with CCTB and proposals to increase military spending as well. As Martin said, let them.

This is typical of France coming up with some mad idea and the smaller states saying No because they have the power. Doesn't suit some to see that though!

Ponster

Seanies32 wrote: »

It seems the so called bullying by France isn't working.

Finland and Austria have said Ireland will not be bullied.

The No side lend far too much significance to France. They did it with CCTB and proposals to increase military spending as well. As Martin said, let them.

This is typical of France coming up with some mad idea and the smaller states saying No because they have the power. Doesn't suit some to see that though!

If you would be as nice in future to refer to not refer to France but to the French government[/] please the same way that people wish Europe to look to the Irish government for the failure of the treaty to pass rather than the Irish themselves. Polls in both left and right-wing newspapers have shown that the French would have voted "no" for a second time had they been given the chance to vote again.

K-9

As we are talking about the EU Parliament, Commission and Governments.

Do you have a link to the polls and the reasons why?

ixtlan

Seanies32 wrote: »

The No side lend far too much significance to France. They did it with CCTB and proposals to increase military spending as well. As Martin said, let them.

Absolutely correct. As the EU has expanded the core countries of France and Germany have become less important, and they have accepted that. Don't get me wrong, they are very important, and their enthusiasm for the European project is critical, but it's not the case that they control the destiny of the EU. We, the EU, are now too diverse for that.

Ix.

dresden8

clown bag wrote: »

Regarding mc creavy it was asked "just what kind of people do we allow in this commission".

Well, generally the type like McCreevy who was getting shafted by Bertie and put out to pasture, and failed politicians like Mandelson who had to resign twice in his own country, but Tony got him the job because he's his mate.

nhughes100

I pointed out this before the vote(Mc Creevy not reading the treaty and neither did Cowan btw) and got fairly slated on these boards - It doesn't matter that he hasn't read every single page, he was so involved in the negotiations that he already understands it so he doesn't need to read it etc etc etc. Well looks like I'm in agreement with the EU on this one.

Jip

Heard a clip of todays debate just now, it is fairly heated but there's some good rhetoric coming from the UK and many Euro-sceptic European MEPs saying Ireland shouldn't be bullied and they're also wearing "I support Ireland" jumpers or something like that.

Hitman Actual

nhughes100 wrote: »

I pointed out this before the vote(Mc Creevy not reading the treaty and neither did Cowan btw) and got fairly slated on these boards - It doesn't matter that he hasn't read every single page, he was so involved in the negotiations that he already understands it so he doesn't need to read it etc etc etc. Well looks like I'm in agreement with the EU on this one.

No, you're in agreement with what looks like one comment by one person. Not everyone in the EU. Do we even know who said that about McCreevy yesterday, and in what context? Reliable links please, not just what was heard in a 30 second segment on Newstalk.

brianthebard

http://breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhgbgbeygboj/

You couldn't have done that yourself lenny?

Scofflaw

nhughes100 wrote: »

I pointed out this before the vote(Mc Creevy not reading the treaty and neither did Cowan btw) and got fairly slated on these boards - It doesn't matter that he hasn't read every single page, he was so involved in the negotiations that he already understands it so he doesn't need to read it etc etc etc. Well looks like I'm in agreement with the EU on this one.

No, you're in agreement with a comment by an MEP. There are seven hundred and fifty of them. It's like claiming that what a single TD says represents government policy.

wearily,
Scofflaw

brianthebard

Its not that simple Scoffy, it was the leader of the socialist group and he has the backing of the socialist group, so its much more than one rogue MEP mouthing off.

edit; this is a link to a list of their members, who all appear to be Meps. there are 216 people on this list.
http://www.socialistgroup.eu/gpes/meplist.do?startpos=1&lg=en

informatively,
Scoffbard.

DarkJager

With the way these immature twats in the EU have been acting, a No vote seems to have been the best thing we ever did as a country.

If you look at the main people involved in this and the comments they have made(France, Germany etc), its pretty plain to see why they wanted a yes vote so badly. It would mean that the larger states in the EU would get all the say in decision making, and we'd be left in the corner like the red headed stepchild of Europe, regardless of how we voted.

nhughes100

Scofflaw wrote: »

No, you're in agreement with a comment by an MEP. There are seven hundred and fifty of them. It's like claiming that what a single TD says represents government policy.

wearily,
Scofflaw

Incorrect, read the link, The leader of the socialist group of MEP's called for this, so if Eamon Gilmore, a single TD who happens to be the leader of our socialist party made a statement - one could reasonably assume that to be Labour party policy?? So lets see what happens if this is put to a vote

karen3212

Jip wrote: »

Heard a clip of todays debate just now, it is fairly heated but there's some good rhetoric coming from the UK and many Euro-sceptic European MEPs saying Ireland shouldn't be bullied and they're also wearing "I support Ireland" jumpers or something like that.

Oh dear God, that's UKIP, UK independence party, they want out of the EU completely, I don't think they even want to go back to Britannia rules the world days - as some aristocratic decendents who are now UK MPs would like. At least the latter are desperate for the power of the old days and old ways, I can't make head nor tail of UKIP.

Scofflaw

nhughes100 wrote: »

Incorrect, read the link, The leader of the socialist group of MEP's called for this, so if Eamon Gilmore, a single TD who happens to be the leader of our socialist party made a statement - one could reasonably assume that to be Labour party policy?? So lets see what happens if this is put to a vote

One can reasonably choose to make that assumption, certainly, although EP parties are not the tight groupings we have here, but loose associations. I accept your point - and withdraw the comment about the "single MEP".

Nevertheless, my original comment, that this in no reasonable way can be construed as the position of the EU, stands. If the EP voted to censure McCreevy, that would be pretty meaningful, although it would still not represent the position of the Commission or the Council.

cordially,
Scofflaw

SkepticOne

Seanies32 wrote: »

It seems the so called bullying by France isn't working.

Finland and Austria have said Ireland will not be bullied.

The No side lend far too much significance to France. They did it with CCTB and proposals to increase military spending as well. As Martin said, let them.

This is typical of France coming up with some mad idea and the smaller states saying No because they have the power. Doesn't suit some to see that though!

In fairness, some on the Yes side also used the early bullying and veiled threats in an attempt to support their case. "Look at what the No side have got us into" type of thing. It can be spun both ways by both sides.

Hitman Actual

brianthebard wrote: »

http://breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhgbgbeygboj/

You couldn't have done that yourself lenny?

I think you'll agree that it's better that the person making a post should back up said post with a reliable link where necessary.

But I acknowledge that the issue is more serious than I thought. It's still not the whole EU leadership though.

And tbh, it was an extremely stupid comment by McCreevy in the first place. It's hardly surprising that there is some fall-out over it.

nhughes100

Scofflaw wrote: »

Nevertheless, my original comment, that this in no reasonable way can be construed as the position of the EU, stands. If the EP voted to censure McCreevy, that would be pretty meaningful, although it would still not represent the position of the Commission or the Council.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I'm not sure how this one will progress and I'm not even sure what the EU/commission/council censure processes are. It would be unlike Champagne Charlie to go down quietly in any case.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Look I haven't read this whole thread as I don't have time so please accept my apologies in advance if someone else has raised this.

MEP's are directly elected, the EP is the most democratic of the EU institutions.

One of the major complaints of the 'No' camp was the democratic deficit, well any noises from the EP are telling you what democratic Europe thinks.

molloyjh

clown bag wrote: »

fairly hardline stuff.

looks like the Irish government is being held to account because of their "failure to explain to the Irish people the benefits of the Lisbon treaty".

Regarding mc creavy it was asked "just what kind of people do we allow in this commission".

Looks like those who voted to stick 2 fingers up at the government have got their wish. The Irish government is on the end of a battering according to that snippet.

Re-negotiation also seems to be ruled out, by the sounds of it the "Governments failure" to produce a yes vote has turned european leaders against them. Sounded like the bold child being sent to bed without dinner.

Well to be fair, they did do a terrible job of promoting the Treaty. If only the Irish people were as tough with them!

Jip

karen3212 wrote: »

Oh dear God, that's UKIP, UK independence party, they want out of the EU completely,

Yeah, I now realise that after seeing the News @ 1, didn't know the details of who it was when I posted, they got a slating from the Irish MEPs because of it and their abuse of the Irish flag on Friday, using it as a beer mat as I noticed myself, and the fact that if Britain had respect for the Irish wishes decades ago they would have saved alot of trouble in the world

nesf

karen3212 wrote: »

Oh dear God, that's UKIP, UK independence party, they want out of the EU completely, I don't think they even want to go back to Britannia rules the world days - as some aristocratic decendents who are now UK MPs would like. At least the latter are desperate for the power of the old days and old ways, I can't make head nor tail of UKIP.

Yeah, watching them celebrating the Irish vote, while using the Irish flag as a tablecloth was, *interesting*.

nhughes100

I'm quite sure the UKIP/BNP etc consider us to still be part of the empire so I wouldn't put too much faith in their support for us.

limklad

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Look I haven't read this whole thread as I don't have time so please accept my apologies in advance if someone else has raised this.

MEP's are directly elected, the EP is the most democratic of the EU institutions.

One of the major complaints of the 'No' camp was the democratic deficit, well any noises from the EP are telling you what democratic Europe thinks.

Yes the EP is the most democratic institution of the EU.
You are forgetting something else.

They is unanimous agreement by all EU countries for any EU treaty for it to come into effect it must be unanimous. This is the principle in which each and every country within EU sign up for and was the basic for peace and cooperation and move forward with common goals in trade etc. The EU was born in the first place so a bigger country cannot bully smaller ones into unworkable situtions. They knew this would be an issue and accepted the consequences of that when they signed. They also sign up for respect for each member democratic rights and ratification process.

Denmark was in this very same situation with the Maastricht Treaty when the EU was born. They still have many opts outs, just as the UK. So this situation is not New or disastrous either.

Ponster

limklad wrote: »

Denmark was in this very same situation with the Maastricht Treaty when the EU was born. They still have many opts outs, just as the UK. So this situation is not New or disastrous either.

Funny you should mention that. Here's a article from the then foreign minister of Denmark, Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, where he says "We in Denmark have been marred by those opt-outs ever since."

Ireland must agree to go.

limklad

Ponster wrote: »

Funny you should mention that. Here's a article from the then foreign minister of Denmark, Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, where he says "We in Denmark have been marred by those opt-outs ever since."

Ireland must agree to go.

And the politicians never seam to learn from the past, that they need to communicate with their people and get the treaty right in the first place instead of the way they handled themselves getting the “Lisbon Treaty”.

PHB

It seems to me like the EU are trying to bully the Irish government, not necessarily the Irish people.

No matter what side of the campaign you are on, there's nobody who doens't think that the government went about the entire campaign the wrong way and royally ****ed up [whether that influenced the result of the referendum is another question]

Some countries in the EU will see the Irish government as a joke. The only real political reason not to put it to referendum again is either that it won't pass or that it'll hurt the government electorally.

People have an ashtonishing talent for blame. If the mood turns that the referendum was a mistake, i.e. in the people who voted no, I can see the blame being put on the government for not running a proper campaign. FF don't want this to happen obviously.

FF are trying to negotiate domestic pressures but at the same time have huge international pressures. They are probably trying to ensure the domestic pressures are best dealt with, and in all honestly, who doens't think that if FF was given the chance of leaving the EU or getting elected again they'd pick getting elected again.

Personally, even though I was in favour of the treaty, I'm quite enjoying FF get screwed in the ass which is what is happening right now.

marco_polo

limklad wrote: »

And the politicians never seam to learn from the past, that they need to communicate with their people and get the treaty right in the first place instead of the way they handled themselves getting the “Lisbon Treaty”.

The cheek of 27 national governments to negotiate an international agreement. Why they didn't just book a conference room for all 500m of us first time around I'll never know.

Also it is not like the Treaty has been kept a secret all this time, all the main points covered in the treaty have been know about and openly available in the public domain for six-seven years now. There was plenty of time for the citizens of the EU to read up on and object to any aspects they disagreed with if they had been arsed.

Scofflaw

nhughes100 wrote: »

I'm not sure how this one will progress and I'm not even sure what the EU/commission/council censure processes are. It would be unlike Champagne Charlie to go down quietly in any case.

They'd need a vote of no confidence in the Commission, like the one that brought down the Santer Commission. Extraordinarily unlikely.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

PHB wrote: »

It seems to me like the EU are trying to bully the Irish government, not necessarily the Irish people.

No matter what side of the campaign you are on, there's nobody who doens't think that the government went about the entire campaign the wrong way and royally ****ed up [whether that influenced the result of the referendum is another question]

Some countries in the EU will see the Irish government as a joke. The only real political reason not to put it to referendum again is either that it won't pass or that it'll hurt the government electorally.

People have an ashtonishing talent for blame. If the mood turns that the referendum was a mistake, i.e. in the people who voted no, I can see the blame being put on the government for not running a proper campaign. FF don't want this to happen obviously.

FF are trying to negotiate domestic pressures but at the same time have huge international pressures. They are probably trying to ensure the domestic pressures are best dealt with, and in all honestly, who doens't think that if FF was given the chance of leaving the EU or getting elected again they'd pick getting elected again.

Personally, even though I was in favour of the treaty, I'm quite enjoying FF get screwed in the ass which is what is happening right now.

Ah, schadenfreude!

similarly,
Scofflaw

limklad

marco_polo wrote: »

The cheek of 27 national governments to negotiate an international agreement. Why they didn't just book a conference room for all 500m of us first time around I'll never know.

Also it is not like the Treaty has been kept a secret all this time, all the main points covered in the treaty have been know about and openly available in the public domain for six-seven years now. There was plenty of time for the citizens of the EU to read up on and object to any aspects they disagreed with if they had been arsed.

7 Years!! that the government had to educate us on it and they failed miserably, but there is also no point of reading a complex document when they are still in negotiation and horse trading, passing brown envelopes etc, on it until they finally agree.

But first they should have held meeting at both local and national level on the future of Ireland in the EU. They are well able to call party local and national meeting, so they are very competence on setting up meetings. It was just a combination of arrogance and ignorance on the government part believing that the people will do what they say.

marco_polo

limklad wrote: »

7 Years!! that the government had to educate us on it and they failed miserably, but there is also no point of reading a complex document when they are still in negotiation and horse trading, passing brown envelopes etc, on it until they finally agree.

But first they should have held meeting at both local and national level on the future of Ireland in the EU. They are well able to call party local and national meeting, so they are very competence on setting up meetings. It was just a combination of arrogance and ignorance on the government part believing that the people will do what they say.

Well I am a firm believer that people have an obligation to educate themselves as well. Certainly if the kind of direct engagement that you propose is to work that must be a prequisite. Clearly alot of voters people believed there was no point in even reading a decent summary of said complex document.

If you don't trust the government telling you which way to vote (Not advocating that anyone should actually do this in a healthy democracy) then why on earth would you trust any interpretation of the treaty by given to you by them. Seems a bit of a contradiction to me. Let the citizens decide, but only if spoonfed by the government first.

I see what you have done with the brown envelope statement. Very clever. :rolleyes: